Treaty would make U.S. nukes safer and more reliable
By Thomas P. D’Agostino
-
The Washington Times
4:07 p.m., Monday, December 13, 2010

The debate over New START has ushered in a new consensus on the need to modernize our nuclear deterrent and the resources required to get the job done. All that is left is for Congress to vote this month to finish the job by approving New START and the president’s investment in our nuclear security. In doing so, it will have reversed years of neglect and decline in our nuclear establishment, and made the American people safer in the process.

(more…)

The case for ratifying the New START treaty is compelling. The US military leadership, respected national security officials and The Consensus for American Security have spoken. Want proof? Read the signatories on our latest print ad. (more…)

Sen. Gary Hart and Dr. David Kay spoke with XM national radio host of The Morning Briefing, Tim Farley, about the need to ratify the New START treaty.

Dr. Kay said:

“The New START treaty, in fact, for an inspector is a lot better than the old one. It provides almost instantaneous transmission of information about movement of warheads. It provides short notice, 18 short notice inspections. This is a cadre of expertise that we’ve developed over the years [...]. START treaties and strategic arms negotiations [...] have provided the development of a cadre of people who know how to do this who have the language and technical expertise. We’re not using those people now, for a year, and if this treaty is not ratified very, very soon, you’re going to start to see those people disappear into other jobs. You cannot imagine how expensive it would be to rebuild that cadre.”

“When you have inspectors on the ground in a place like Russia, you get an insight into what’s happening in their system, their military developments, what’s coming around. And, it gives you far better intelligence.  I’ve spent a lot of my career staring at satellite photos and listening to communications intercepts. They provide data points. They don’t provide context. They don’t tell you what is the human element and what people are thinking and how they’re going. We’ve lost that. We’re blind right now with regard to Russian strategic nuclear weapons.”

Dr. David Kay on XM radio’s The Morning Briefing with Tim Farley, about the need to ratify the New START treaty.

By Lt. General Dirk Jameson

The Hill

02 Dec 2010

Augusta Free Press

Lt Gen John Castellaw

Posted on Dec 2, 2010

Dec. 5th marks an important milestone in relation to America’s national security – the one-year anniversary since the U.S. inspection of Russian nuclear facilities expired. But the obstacle to resuming inspections isn’t an intransigent Russia, but Senate delays in ratifying the New START arms reduction treaty – delays that put political considerations ahead of U.S. national security.

(more…)

Senator Gary Hart Warns That Delaying New START Treaty Could Mean Years Before the US Has Inspectors Back on the Ground in Russia

Washington D.C., 30 November 2010: Today former Senator Gary Hart (D-CO), who was a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and was heavily involved in numerous other arms control treaties, warned that if the New START treaty is not ratified before the end of 2010, it could mean years before the treaty is ratified. (more…)

Thursday 25 November 2010

Lt. Gen. Dirk Jameson

Through the long Thanksgiving weekend, we were reminded how people came together, shared resources, shared opinions and worked together to form and protect our nation.

(more…)

By Lt. Gen. Norman Seip

The Post and Courier, 11/23/2010

For almost 20 years, the U.S. has had inspectors on the ground in Russia to conduct inspections and surveillance of the Russian nuclear arsenal. (more…)

Wall Street Journal

President Obama has shown that missile defense and arms control can proceed hand-in-hand.

By JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR.
24 November 2010
In September 2009, when President Obama decided to alter his predecessor’s plans for missile defense in Europe, some critics claimed that we had sacrificed our allies in the interest of the “reset” with Russia. Others thought that we would derail the reset by proceeding with the new plan. The skeptics were wrong on both counts.
(more…)